Maintenance Notice

Due to necessary scheduled maintenance, the JMIR Publications website will be unavailable from Wednesday, July 01, 2020 at 8:00 PM to 10:00 PM EST. We apologize in advance for any inconvenience this may cause you.

Who will be affected?

Accepted for/Published in: JMIR Human Factors

Date Submitted: Nov 23, 2020
Date Accepted: Apr 5, 2021

The final, peer-reviewed published version of this preprint can be found here:

Comparing Single-Page, Multipage, and Conversational Digital Forms in Health Care: Usability Study

Iftikhar A, Bond RR, McGilligan V, Leslie SJ, Rjoob K, Knoery C, Quigg C, Campell R, Bond K, McShane A, Peace A

Comparing Single-Page, Multipage, and Conversational Digital Forms in Health Care: Usability Study

JMIR Hum Factors 2021;8(2):e25787

DOI: 10.2196/25787

PMID: 34037531

PMCID: 8190652

Digital Forms in Healthcare: Comparing the Usability of Single-Page, Multi-Page and Conversational Forms

  • Aleeha Iftikhar; 
  • Raymond R. Bond; 
  • Victoria McGilligan; 
  • Stephen J. Leslie; 
  • Khaled Rjoob; 
  • Charles Knoery; 
  • Ciara Quigg; 
  • Ryan Campell; 
  • Kyle Bond; 
  • Anne McShane; 
  • Aaron Peace

ABSTRACT

Background:

Even in the era of digital technology, a number of hospitals still rely on paper-based forms for data entry for patient admission, triage, drug prescriptions, and procedures. Paper-based forms can be efficient to complete but often at the expense of data quality, completeness, sustainability, and automated data analytics to name but a few limitations. As an additional benefit, digital forms could also assist with decision making when deciding on the appropriate response to certain data inputs (e.g. when classifying symptoms, etc.).

Objective:

Objective:

Nevertheless, there is a lack of empirical best practices and guidelines for the interaction design of digital health forms. In this study, we assess the usability of three different interactive forms, namely 1) a single page digital form (where all data input is required on one web page), 2) a multi-page digital form and 3) a conversational digital form (a chatbot).

Methods:

Methods:

These three digital forms were developed as candidates to replace a current paper-based form that is used to record patient referrals to an interventional cardiology department (Cath-Lab) at Altnagelvin Hospital. We recorded three different usability metrics from data collected in a counterbalanced usability test (60 usability tests: 20 subjects x 3 form usability tests).

Results:

Results:

The usability metrics includes the SUS questionnaire, UEQ, and a final customised questionnaire. We found that the single-page form outperformed the other two digital form techniques in almost all of the metrics. The mean SUS score for the single page form was 76±15.8 (p<0.05) and achieved the least task completion time compared to the other two digital form styles.

Conclusions:

Conclusion: In conclusion, the digital single page form outperformed the other two forms in almost all the usability metrics. The mean SUS score for the single page was 76±15 with the least task completion time compared to other two digital forms. Moreover, upon answering the open-ended question, the single-page form was the preferred choice. However, this preference might change over time as multi-page and conversational forms become more common.


 Citation

Please cite as:

Iftikhar A, Bond RR, McGilligan V, Leslie SJ, Rjoob K, Knoery C, Quigg C, Campell R, Bond K, McShane A, Peace A

Comparing Single-Page, Multipage, and Conversational Digital Forms in Health Care: Usability Study

JMIR Hum Factors 2021;8(2):e25787

DOI: 10.2196/25787

PMID: 34037531

PMCID: 8190652

Download PDF


Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.

© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.